Follow us on social

google cta
US personnel wounded in 'dangerous escalation' at Iraq base

US personnel wounded in 'dangerous escalation' at Iraq base

The latest attack on American troops in Iraq sparked call between Sec Def Austin and Israeli counterpart

Reporting | Middle East
google cta
google cta

The U.S. military says it is still weighing its response to a rocket attack on the al-Asad base in western Iraq on Monday. Five U.S. personnel were injured, including one seriously, according to reports.

"Base personnel are conducting a post-attack damage assessment," one of the base officials told reporters, suggesting that the casualty count could change. Two Katyusha rockets were fired at the the base, and one reportedly landed inside. This was the site of the 2020 militant attack following the U.S. assassination of Iran's top military commander Qassem Soleimani in Iraq in 2020. Some 100 American service members were diagnosed with brain injuries after that incident.

The U.S. still has 2,500 troops in Iraq though there has been official talks in recent weeks over efforts to draw them down. However, attacks by Iran-backed militants on the American bases resumed two weeks ago as tensions continued to escalate between Israel and Hezbollah. The U.S. then launched its first airstrike in Iraq in months targeting militants it said were about to launch an unmanned drone in Musayib, north of Baghdad.

The recent attacks add to the 165 incidents on Americans in Iraq and Syria since Israel's war on Gaza began. The U.S. has about 900 troops still in Syria.

U.S. officials are expecting the worst as Israel conducted a series of Hamas and Hezbollah assassinations, including a top political leader, in Tehran, last week. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin had a call with his counterpart Yoav Gallant in Israel Monday night to discuss what he called a "dangerous escalation."

"We agreed the attack from Iran-aligned militias on U.S. forces stationed at Al-Asad Airbase in western Iraq marked a dangerous escalation, and I updated Minister Gallant on measures to strengthen U.S. military posture in light of this escalating situation," Austin posted on X.


While Washington invariably claims our troops are there to confront ISIS remnants and/or Iranian proxies, critics say there is no strategic value to remaining in the region, that these troops are caught in the crossfire of a regional conflict. "Shooting rockets at U.S. bases is a time-tested way for Iran and its proxy militias to harass the Americans whenever the heat rises," charged Defense Priorities analyst and writer Dan DePetris on X shortly after the latest attacks were reported. "They can dial the pressure up or down depending on the circumstances. Removing U.S. forces would remove that card."


AL ASAD AIR BASE, Iraq – Soldiers from Company D, 10th Aviation Regiment, 10th Mountain Division, move a MQ-1C Gray Eagle into position prior to conducting a mission at Al Asad Air Base, Iraq, August, 4,2017. . (U.S. Army photo by Capt. Stephen James)

google cta
Reporting | Middle East
Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?
Top image credit: President Donald J. Trump holds a joint news conference at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Feb. 4, 2025. (Shutterstock/ Joshua Sukoff)

Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?

QiOSK

In the months that led up to the Iraq War, the Bush administration went to extraordinary lengths to convince the world of the need to oust Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Leading officials laid out their case in public, sharing what they claimed was evidence that Iraq was moving rapidly toward the deployment of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. When U.S. tanks rolled across the border, everyone knew the justification: the U.S. was determined to thwart Iraq’s development of weapons of mass destruction, however fictitious that threat would later prove to be.

In the months that led up to the Iran War, the Trump administration took a different tack. President Trump spoke only occasionally of Iran, offering a smattering of justifications for growing U.S. tensions with the country. He claimed without evidence that Iran was rebuilding its nuclear program after the U.S.-Israeli attack last June and even developing missiles that could strike the United States. But he insisted that Tehran could make a deal with seven magic words: “we will never have a nuclear weapon.”

keep readingShow less
Iran says ‘no ship is allowed to pass’ Strait of Hormuz: Reports
Top image credit: A large oil tanker transits the Strait of Hormuz. (Shutterstock/ Clare Louise Jackson)

Iran says ‘no ship is allowed to pass’ Strait of Hormuz: Reports

QiOSK

Hours after the U.S. and Israel launched a campaign of airstrikes across Iran, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is warning vessels in the Persian Gulf via radio that “no ship is allowed to pass the Strait of Hormuz,” according to a report from Reuters.

The news suggests that Iran is ready to pull out all the stops in its response to the U.S.-Israeli barrage, which President Donald Trump says is aimed at toppling the Iranian regime. A full shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz would cause an international crisis given that 20% of the world’s oil passes through the narrow channel. Financial analysts estimate that even one day of a full blockade could cause global oil prices to double from $66 per barrel to more than $120.

keep readingShow less
What Pakistan's 'open war' on Taliban in Afghanistan really means
Top image credit: FILE PHOTO: Afghan Taliban fighters patrol near the Afghanistan-Pakistan border in Spin Boldak, Kandahar Province, following exchanges of fire between Pakistani and Afghan forces in Afghanistan, October 15, 2025. REUTERS/Stringer

What Pakistan's 'open war' on Taliban in Afghanistan really means

QiOSK

Pakistan’s airstrikes on Kabul and Kandahar over the last 24 hours are nothing new. Islamabad has carried out strikes inside Afghanistan several times since the Taliban’s return to power. Pakistan claimed that the Afghan Taliban used drones to conduct strikes in Pakistan.

What distinguishes this latest episode is the rhetorical escalation, with Pakistani officials openly referring to the action as “open war.” While the language grabbed international headlines, it is best understood as part of a managed escalation designed to signal resolve without crossing red lines that would make de-escalation impossible.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.